Printed from https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/non_emergency_ambulance_services_2?utm_campaign=alaveteli-experiments-87&utm_content=sidebar_similar_requests&utm_medium=link&utm_source=whatdotheyknow on September 15, 2019 11:19

I would be grateful if you could supply under FOI details of:
- since 1/1/2015 the company/body(s) contracted by you to supply non-emergency private ambulance service
- For each year since 1/1/2015
a) the name of the supplier(s)
b) for each year please set out the key performance indicator(s) used by the CCG to monitor whether patient journeys are completed on time (i.e if there were unacceptable delays to the collection of patients from home or hospital)
c) the number of times performance against each (KPI) was measured
d) the number of times for each measurement the supplier failed to meet the agreed (KPI) standard, and by how much they failed to meet the standard.
e) the number of times a contract performance notice was issued, and what the contract performance notice related to and required

In the last year any serious incidents to which the NHS manager responsible for oversight of the service(s) was alerted, where patient safety was put at serious risk by any action or inaction of the contractors

It is important that outsourced providers of important health services are subject to public scrutiny. In the past I have found that some authorities are far too ready to engage "prejudice to commercial interests" in regard to any question relating to their dealings with a private supplier. In answering this FOI may I politely remind you that in the past the ICO has repeatedly said that " the Commissioner considers that the chance of prejudice occurring must be more than a hypothetical possibility"

If you anticipate this request falling outside the time permitted for the request, please advise me how it may be amended.

Thank you for your request for information. Your request is being dealt with under the Freedom of Information Act. We aim to provide you with a response within 20 working days from date of this email. If this is not possible we will write and explain the reason for the delay.

If you have any queries about this, please contact the Freedom of Information office. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications. You may also wish to visit our website www.epsom-sthelier.nhs.uk/about-us/freed... or the Office of the Information Commissioner website www.ico.gov.uk for further information.

I would be grateful if you could supply under FOI details of:
- since 1/1/2015 the company/body(s) contracted by you to supply non-emergency private ambulance service
- For each year since 1/1/2015
a) the name of the supplier(s)
b) for each year please set out the key performance indicator(s) used by the CCG to monitor whether patient journeys are completed on time (i.e if there were unacceptable delays to the collection of patients from home or hospital)
c) the number of times performance against each (KPI) was measured
d) the number of times for each measurement the supplier failed to meet the agreed (KPI) standard, and by how much they failed to meet the standard.
e) the number of times a contract performance notice was issued, and what the contract performance notice related to and required

In the last year any serious incidents to which the NHS manager responsible for oversight of the service(s) was alerted, where patient safety was put at serious risk by any action or inaction of the contractors

It is important that outsourced providers of important health services are subject to public scrutiny. In the past I have found that some authorities are far too ready to engage "prejudice to commercial interests" in regard to any question relating to their dealings with a private supplier. In answering this FOI may I politely remind you that in the past the ICO has repeatedly said that " the Commissioner considers that the chance of prejudice occurring must be more than a hypothetical possibility"

If you anticipate this request falling outside the time permitted for the request, please advise me how it may be amended.

Yours faithfully,

chris vallance

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #468117 email]

Is [Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...

Specifically the information should be released for the following reasons:

- The Trust has failed to show that releasing the information "would or would likely" prejudice the commercial interests of the trust. I note that the ICO says: "The Commissioner considers that 'likely to prejudice' means that the possibility of prejudice should be real and significant, and certainly more than hypothetical or remote." The trust does not provide any evidence that prejudice would occur and does not explain how it would occur. Prejudice is according to this response no more than "hypothetical" and you should release the information.

- Section 43 is a qualified exemption, the trust must consider the balance of public interest before withholding information. This is set out on the second page of ICO guidance "The section 43 exemptions are qualified exemptions, subject to the public interest test." The Trust provides no evidence it has done this. In this case there is a very strong public interest in knowing that the contractor is carrying out their work safely and providing value for money.

There is an important point of public policy at stake in this request: that outsourced public services should be subject to public scrutiny. If am not satisfied that the Trust has understood and applied the relevant legislation and guidance I will appeal to the ICO. That will take up both my time and that of the NHS unnecessarily, and could harm the public perception of the Trust if it is found to have incorrectly withheld potentially embarrassing information. Please do consider this review carefully and respond in a timely fashion.

I also note that Trusts have provided information in response to identical requests. So far all those who have held information have released something - none have refused to release any information as you have.

As requested we are undertaking an internal review of our response to your Freedom of Information request and would aim to respond by the 24th April. If this is not possible we will contact you and explain the reason for the delay.

We apologise for the delay in resolving your request for an internal review of the Trust's decision to withhold information in response to your request.

The Trust does not hold information falling within your request, and as part of its reconsideration of that request has sought the views of third party organisations before reaching its decision as to whether that information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. We await those views. We anticipate being able to respond to you by Friday 24th May 2018, and again apologise for the delay in doing so.